As noted, blogging has developed organically -- and this is exactly the reason why it is struggling for legitimacy and recognition. Perhaps analogous to a disciplinary struggle (Comp anyone?), the blog must be defined and examined if it is to sustain itself as a practical tool – academic and otherwise.

Consider the debate that has been raging for years about open source and open standards… Blogging technology is a byproduct of these movements, and as such, blogging elicits a lot of skepticism beyond its primary sites (the academy being one).

In regard to genre, I very much agree with Henry’s comments about how we apply known genres to new “forms” of writing. This has long been a standard practice in and out of the technical writing classroom. What is so unique (and perhaps what complicates the genre discussion) is the act of blogging and the nature of the document. As Edmonds notes:

… using standard Web browsers as the composition, editing and viewing mechanism makes the document itself the interface; an evolving personal information hub augmented in value by its relationships to other hubs on the Web.

It seems to me that regardless of genre, modes, forms, and epistemology, blogs are drawing a lot of attention simply because they are linked (hyperlinked) and multi-perspective. What other genre does that sort of networked self-expression? Chain letters?

I’m still working through this. My thoughts are a bit complicated by an old Robert Kozma article that I just re-read: Will Media Influence Learning: Reframing the debate. I’ll post some comments about this article and my additional thoughts about the Edmonds article over at my joint.